![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
jonb:Zeon: Ban Taxis = destroy obesity epidemic?
Agree. The the idea of getting a taxi for a 1km walk wouldn't even be in my mental list of options - are you people all rolling in spare cash?
KiwiNZ:jonb:Zeon: Ban Taxis = destroy obesity epidemic?
Agree. The the idea of getting a taxi for a 1km walk wouldn't even be in my mental list of options - are you people all rolling in spare cash?
Of course everyone is capable of walking 1.5km. What is that they say about assumptions ?
bazzer:KiwiNZ:jonb:Zeon: Ban Taxis = destroy obesity epidemic?
Agree. The the idea of getting a taxi for a 1km walk wouldn't even be in my mental list of options - are you people all rolling in spare cash?
Of course everyone is capable of walking 1.5km. What is that they say about assumptions ?
Would it be fair to say that most people that catch taxis 1.5km could probably walk it?
KiwiNZ:jonb:
Agree. The the idea of getting a taxi for a 1km walk wouldn't even be in my mental list of options - are you people all rolling in spare cash?
Of course everyone is capable of walking 1.5km. What is that they say about assumptions ?
bazzer: Would it be fair to say that most people that catch taxis 1.5km could probably walk it?
Please support Geekzone by subscribing, or using one of our referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies | Hatch | GoodSync
freitasm:KiwiNZ:jonb:
Agree. The the idea of getting a taxi for a 1km walk wouldn't even be in my mental list of options - are you people all rolling in spare cash?
Of course everyone is capable of walking 1.5km. What is that they say about assumptions ?
"Of course everyone is capable of walking 1.5km" in this sentence is sarcasm. Reading the next sentence gives it away.
freitasm:bazzer: Would it be fair to say that most people that catch taxis 1.5km could probably walk it?
*Most* being the keyword. Not everyone.
networkn: bazzer: Actually I don't agree, there are many legitimate reasons that a fit able person may opt not to to walk a relatively short distance on a cold cold Friday late at night.
networkn:Back to the original question, posted by me, NO that was not a reasonable fare charged by said Cab company and since then another 10-12 people have complained in a public forum about them.
Anyways, asked and answered, I think the thread should be locked before it turns into something it shouldn't.
networkn: bazzer: go backward you'll see what about cab company charged me for the exact same trip yesterday, $6.40 which I rounded up to $7. I can't recall the name of the original company but last night by co-incidence I caught "cheap cabs", the company I went with first was a similarly named cheaper company. Hardly corporate cabs!
bazzer:freitasm:KiwiNZ:jonb:
Agree. The the idea of getting a taxi for a 1km walk wouldn't even be in my mental list of options - are you people all rolling in spare cash?
Of course everyone is capable of walking 1.5km. What is that they say about assumptions ?
"Of course everyone is capable of walking 1.5km" in this sentence is sarcasm. Reading the next sentence gives it away.
Not sure who this is directed at? Just clearing things up for everyone reading this? It's pretty obviously sarcasm.
freitasm:bazzer: Would it be fair to say that most people that catch taxis 1.5km could probably walk it?
*Most* being the keyword. Not everyone.
I'd already seen that thread, so I was well aware that KiwiNZ might not be able to walk the 1km-1.5km. It doesn't change my response.
The main thrust of the discussion at that point was that a lot of people seemed to be catching taxis short distances when they probably (given my suggested clarification to "most") didn't need to be. Zeon proposed, tongue in cheek I suggest, that banning taxis and making people walk these short distances could cure NZ's obesity epidemic.
Given KiwiNZ's disability, he took this personally and came back with a sarcastic response. I simply wanted clarification on what level of generalisation/hyperbole was acceptable to him. While I am sympathetic to his situation, the fact remains that a lot of people would be a lot better off if they walked every now and again (as is being suggested here).
If any of networkn, nate or almaznz are incapable of walking 1.5km due to a disability (being unfit/lazy is not really a disability) then I would recant my statement. Otherwise, it would seem KiwiNZ is being a bit precious.
networkn:
Anyway I emailed the company, not expecting much, won't use them again. Problem is that it's "bad manners" to not take the first taxi in the rank.
networkn: bazzer: I am not sure what you want me to say, obviously being of above average intelligence I tried to compare them as closely as I could. This guy didn't end up with quite as many lights, but the first trip wasn't terrible for it anyway. He drove at 30km an hour despite clear traffic and slowed down HOPING for the lights to change, $6 to $12 is a big difference IN MY OPINION. I personally would consider $6-9 reasonable for a reasonable cheap taxi company. I don't recall the company I used the first time, but it was one of the worst cabs I'd been in in NZ, so I presume it would not normally have been a corporate cab type cab company.
Hopefully this supplies you with enough information!
KiwiNZ: I retorted with I admit a degree of sarcasm due to two post where assumptions are made they are,
"Zeon: Ban Taxis = destroy obesity epidemic?" and "Agree. The the idea of getting a taxi for a 1km walk wouldn't even be in my mental list of options - are you people all rolling in spare cash?"
My sarcasm was born from frustration and the inferred reasons why people will use Taxi's as opposed to walking. Prejudice takes many forms.
I apologise if anyone took offense, all I ask is for thought before assumption.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |